Field BIM and mobile BIM technologies: a requirements taxonomy and its interactions with construction management functions

Abstract

Purpose

This study aims to develop a taxonomy of requirements for mobile BIM technologies (MBT), clarify the relating terms and concepts, and identify the interactions between MBT features and the construction management functions on sites.

Design/methodology/approach

A positivist approach with elements of interpretivism is adopted to allow to capture what is perceived as “reality” in relation to individuals’ interpretation and experience in the use and implementation of MBT. This is achieved by using a mixed qualitative-quantitative approach that can capture the various understandings of MBT. The research methods included a longitudinal case study over 12 months, two project workshops, expert interviews and an industry survey that together helped to investigate MBT at project, enterprise and industry levels.

Findings

The MBT requirements taxonomy included requirements relating to both project and organisation. Project requirements addressed MBT functionalities for sites and information management, while organisation requirements focused on the integration of MBT solutions with the enterprise from information technology, legal and security perspectives. A detailed matrix showing the interactions between five key MBT features and seven construction management functions was also developed.

Research limitations/implications

The two constructs developed by this study can help researchers to structure their investigation of key uses of MBT applications and their benefits. It can be used by researchers aiming to investigate integrated approaches to the digitalisation of construction sites, such as those enabled by Digital Twins. The interaction matrix can aid researchers in evaluating the intersections between the MBT functionalities and the site construction management functions (e.g. theoretical analysis of interactions from Lean Construction, benefit evaluation perspective). More broadly, the two constructs can support research and practice investigating the development of data-driven approaches on construction sites.

Practical implications

The developed MBT taxonomy can guide construction organisations in selecting suitable MBT for Field BIM for their projects. It can also act as a baseline against which varying MBT solutions can be compared.

Originality/value

Constructs such as taxonomies for MBTs; an understanding of MBT capabilities and use within the industry; and a lack of delineation between related terms, such as Mobile BIM, Field BIM, Site BIM, Cloud BIM and Mobile Apps, were lacking in the literature. This study contributed to addressing this gap.

Citation

Jowett, B., Edwards, D.J. and Kassem, M. (2024), "Field BIM and mobile BIM technologies: a requirements taxonomy and its interactions with construction management functions", Construction Innovation, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 134-163. https://doi.org/10.1108/CI-07-2022-0160

1. Introduction

Building information modelling (BIM) tools and workflows provide a variety of applications or uses that cover the whole project lifecycle from design, through construction, to operation and maintenance. Applications for the construction site stage, enabled by rapid technological development in digital innovation technologies, have proliferated in recent years. This is driven by their value proposition of improved site efficiencies and their ability to integrate site project teams and enable information sharing.

These applications, clustered under the term “Field BIM” and enabled through “Mobile BIM Technologies” (MBT), have started to attract research attention only in recent years (Abanda et al., 2018). Existing studies on MBT (such as that of Cox et al., 2002; Elvin, 2003; Kimoto et al., 2005; Chen and Kamara, 2008, 2011; Nourbakhsh et al., 2012; Kim et al., 2013; Abanda et al., 2018) have generally focused on specific applications of MBT and their implementation in selected site use cases as demonstrated later in Table 1. There is still a dearth of research studies proposing constructs such as taxonomies of requirements for MBT and clarifying their project and organisational requirements and their interactions with construction project management functions.

There is also limited clarity about the terms used in this field. Several terms such as Mobile BIM, Field BIM, Site BIM, Cloud BIM and Mobile Apps exist and are used interchangeably (such as in Abanda et al., 2018 and Rolfsen, 2019). For example, a cloud-based BIM technology may not have field (or site) functionalities and vice versa. Hence, there is also a need to clarify the terminology used in this domain. To address this issue, this paper separates between two concepts: “Field BIM” as the overarching domain of uses or applications of BIM on construction sites; and MBT as the enabling technology of Field BIM. In line with this delineation, “Field BIM” is defined as a BIM use or model use where project information (i.e. BIMs, documents and data) is used on construction sites to assist in the various construction management functions. “Mobile BIM Technologies” enables “Field BIM” by providing the necessary information management capabilities (e.g. accessing relevant project information, viewing and editing project information, submitting requests, etc.) required to fulfil the construction management functions on site. The resulting expression (i.e. “Mobile BIM Technology for Field BIM”) from merging the two terms is envisioned to reduce the ambiguity identified earlier.

The aim of this research is to develop a taxonomy of requirements for MBT, identify the interactions between MBT and the construction site management functions, and evaluate the industry’s views of current MBT capabilities. Section 2 provides a review of related literature and evidences the gap. Section 3 presents the research methodology and research methods. Sections 4, 5 and 6, respectively, present the investigations done at project, organisation and industry levels. Section 7 presents the two key constructs (i.e. the taxonomy and the interaction matrix). Section 8 discusses the findings of the research and provides concluding statements, including areas for further research.

2. Review of related studies

2.1 Studies related to mobile building information modelling technologies

Interest in mobile construction management applications has been driven by the growing adoption of BIM (Kim et al., 2013). Table 1 shows the variety of terms used to describe MBT and the range of technologies that could be considered as MBT by authors. From the analysis of relating terms and concepts presented earlier, this paper addressed the issue of clarity around terms used by distinguishing between “Field BIM” to refer to their uses and applications on site and “MBT” to refer to the enabling technologies of such uses and applications.

Since their early appearance, Field BIM and MBT were deemed as enablers of improvement in productivity and project performance (Kim et al., 2011). This growing interest in Field BIM and MBT has been recently consolidated further with the establishment of data-centric construction and engineering concepts (Sacks et al., 2020). More broadly, the interest of the Architecture, Engineering, Construction and Owner sector in data analytics to improve productivity and performance at business level (Heger, 2014; Mencarini, 2014) has also contributed to drive the popularity of Field BIM and MBT.

Existing studies have investigated the importance of integrating MBT within project workflows. Despite the suggested value propositions and benefits of MBT and the growing interest in Field BIM, site-born information and data were often criticised for its ineffective use and integration with the BIM model. Feedback loops from site to BIM models have been error-prone, labour-intensive and expensive to maintain (Becerik-Gerber et al., 2011; McCabe et al., 2017; Hamledari et al., 2018). Such feedback loops are also considered as a critical barrier to BIM implementation (Azhar, 2011; Ding et al., 2014; Volk et al., 2014). For example, effective site inspection using MBT, that can update the BIM model, is key for the efficient development of as-built information (Becerik-Gerber et al., 2011). Recognising the significance of data interoperability and integration, Fischer et al. (2017) suggested that site-born data needed to be directly integrated into the BIM to achieve an integrated quality control process using model-based approaches.

Hamledari et al. (2018) suggested that direct integration of site data with BIM workflows through interoperable approaches, such as via the Industry Foundation Classes (IFC), will enhance the communication, accessibility and usefulness of such data. However, there are still limitations to be overcome:

• there is a risk of overburdening site teams with too much data through the MBT, which can be counter-productive (Chu et al., 2018) – supporting this proposition, Kerosuo et al. (2015) also noted that site teams tended to prefer two-dimensional (2D) paper drawings due to the perceived increase in effort of accessing information via a three-dimensional (3D) model;

• much design information is exchanged in 2D formats (e.g. plans, sections, elevations and non-graphical data) which affect the accessibility to critical construction information found within drawings and specifications, requiring human recognition and intervention (Wang and Love, 2012) and challenges the usability of MBT and its information utility (Aziz and Tezel, 2017); and

• many contractual processes still require a hardcopy of signed-off drawings, demonstrating the lack of acknowledgement of the wider use of interoperable digital data throughout the life cycle of an asset (Aziz and Tezel, 2017).

In addition to investigating feedback loops from site to BIM models, research studies have also investigated the MBT access to information databases (Kim et al., 2008; Reinhardt et al., 2005) and how to leverage this capability to populate on-site inspections (Cox et al., 2002; Ibrahim et al., 2004; Nguyen et al., 2015). It has been suggested that the adoption of such applications can result in improved project communication (Ibrahim et al., 2004; Kim et al., 2008; Tsai et al., 2014).

The security of information with cloud technologies was highlighted as an important aspect for BIM technologies, according to Mahamadu et al. (2013). It is underpinned by risk factors that are related not only to technology but also to rganizational and project environment (Mahamadu et al., 2013). Recently, some standards, such as ISO 19650–5 (BSi, 2020), have set out the processes to be undertaken regarding security measures to be taken within a BIM process.

A considerable part of the literature has focused on studying key capabilities of MBT and their benefits. In these studies, BIM “Cloud” or BIM “cloud-based Technology” is commonly referenced in place of MBT (as in Chuang et al., 2011; Abanda et al., 2018). Most of these studies – as in Chong et al. (2014), Wong et al. (2014), Wang and Chong (2015) and Abanda et al. (2018) – have identified the possibility for enhanced levels of cooperation and collaboration through remote and real-time communication.

When reviewing cloud-based technologies available from a range of global service providers to the construction industry, Chong et al. (2014) identified that 68% of the applications reviewed facilitated mobile access, whereas only 13% facilitated BIM integration. Applications that were both mobile and offered BIM access equated to 10% of the applications reviewed. This point is of significance when distinguishing MBT from broader cloud-based technology, as much of the current research tends to use the two concepts interchangeably.

The relationship between the Cloud, Field BIM and MBT has been increasingly recognised in research. Alizadeh Salehi and Yitmen (2018) investigated how various forms of on-site data can converge to produce automated progress reporting, resulting in productivity efficiencies and improved data quality. Studies have also investigated the role of data generated in the field, the sources of such data, and its position within Cyber Physical system architectures. For example, Banerjee and Nayaka (2022) recognised various data sources that connect to the Internet of Things and how they can enable better information flow to initiate a shift from silo solutions to smart ecosystems. Mutis and Mehraj (2022) also researched into various forms of data, including BIM data, and their role within cloud-based environments resulting in a Cloud BIM governance framework. The significance of needing a governance framework was highlighted in recognising its role as a fundamental instrument for creating quality, handling and security of cloud-based BIM data, supporting an organisation’s decision-making process and enhancing organisational growth.

It is therefore important to consider how research into field data-generating technologies such as MBT interacts with other ecosystems, such as those held in the cloud, and how such data can be managed to provide benefits. This relationship is reflected in this research, recognising that Field BIM and MBT require to be studied from a project, organisation and industry perspective.

There are number of research gaps regarding MBT and Field BIM:

• Research on MBT, and associated terms or related derivatives, has tended to focus upon one or a few use cases within a single project (as in Cox et al., 2002; Elvin, 2003; Kimoto et al., 2005; Chen and Kamara, 2008, 2011; Nourbakhsh et al., 2012; Kim et al., 2013). Research into general constructs (e.g. taxonomy of requirements) that support its adoption across projects, organisations and the wider industry is lacking.

• The benefits of BIM are generally investigated during preconstruction and design stages. Research into key areas of the construction stage such as defect management (Lin et al., 2016) and its enhancement through BIM have not been sufficiently considered from Field BIM and MBT field. More broadly, possible interactions between MBT and construction management functions on site have been holistically addressed.

• There is also a limited understanding of the terms used, the technological requirements of MBT for field BIM and the interplay between Field BIM and other organizational requirements.

To address the identified gaps, this paper develops a taxonomy of requirements for MBT that addresses both organisational and project requirements and an interaction matrix between the MBT characteristics and the core construction management functions on site, as well as it investigates the industry-wide perspective about MBT and Field BIM and their use cases and benefits. These outputs are achieved using a combination of research methods aimed at project, organisation and industry levels. These levels reflect the characteristics of Field BIM and MBT as a potential generator of data that can constitute a data silo (e.g. a single project) or be part of a larger data ecosystem (e.g. organisation or enterprise data infrastructure, cyber physical architectures).

3. Research methodology and methods

This study aims to develop a taxonomy of requirements for MBT, identify the interactions between MBT features and key construction site management functions, and analyse industry-wide perspective about MBT and Field BIM and their use cases and benefits.

This research paradigm is mainly positivist with elements of interpretivism. The positivist paradigm is manifested through the researchers access to a certain “reality” (i.e. understanding and implementation of MBT within the industry), which was investigated using quantitative methods as part of the mixed research methods design. The interpretivism element is necessary to acknowledge the complex and unpredictable nature of what is perceived as “reality” (Myers, 2008), which in this case is represented by the individuals’ interpretation and experiences in use and implementation of MBT. This is addressed by complementing quantitative research methods with qualitative research methods to capture the nuances around the use and functionalities of MBT.

The research approach is inductive, and this is evidenced through the collection of a vast range of data that are gathered and synthesised for the purpose of developing the two constructs. All the selected techniques are supported by adequate sampling approaches of projects and participants, as well as by the close interactions of the researchers with the data in the actual field. The details about each research method deployed are included later in their respective section/sub-section (i.e. Project Perspective, Organisational Perspective, Independent Expert Perspective) as illustrated in Figure 1. Figure 1 shows how this study combines investigations at three complementary levels; the project, the organisation and the wider industry level.

At the project level, the study uses a triangulated approach based on a real-world case study that combines field observation over a 12-month period, questionnaires and expert interviews. The selection of a case study in the context of this paper is in line with the notion that case studies, as empirical inquiry means, can provide in-depth data in situations where the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clear (Yin, 2018; Proverbs and Gameson, 2008; Collis and Hussey, 2009). Case study research can also accommodate varying research techniques which use both qualitative and quantitative data (Yin, 2018; Gerring and Mcdermott, 2007), which aligns with the approach adopted in this paper. Although case study research has various advantages, it also presents some key risks, such as a shortage of rigour, generalisations being difficult to establish, susceptibility to bias and excessive length (Yin, 2018). This study mitigates such risks through a longitudinal case study over 12 months, the deployment of a triangulated approach to the case study that uses a workshop at the start of the 12-month period of data collection followed by a questionnaire at the end of the 12-month data collection and expert interview that is independent of the case study.

Two further examinations, one at an organisational level and one at an industry level, are also included to capture evidence and influences of the various environments on the two constructs. Investigations at these two levels use an organisational workshop and an industry survey, respectively. The design of these two research methods are covered in Sections 5 and 6, respectively.

In conclusion, the research design involves the simultaneous collection of both quantitative and qualitative data and assigns equal priority to both data sets. Comparing and merging the data sets allows an integrated approach while also providing triangulation of the data (Bryman, 2016). This research design was instrumental to inform the development of the two key constructs targeted by this research; the taxonomy of requirements for MBT, and the interaction matrix between MBT features and construction site management functions. More details about each of the research methods, their design and execution are described in their subsequent dedicated subsection throughout the paper.

4. Project perspective

To capture the project perspective about the requirements and uses of MBT and Field BIM, a case study research was undertaken on a live construction project. The selection criteria for the case study project included:

• a project that is involving the use of federated 3D geometrical models for design and construction;

• a project that is implementing MBT and its associated workflows to perform Field BIM;

• a project that is adopting BIM workflows within the context of an established framework for information management (e.g. the UK BIM Framework); and

• a project that is using non-proprietary data formats to reduce the software-bias in the research outcomes.

The selected case study consisted of a £40m Design and Build Higher Education project situated on a city centre site in Northern England. The project was delivered to “Level 2 BIM” standard (BSi, 2013) and comprised six linked blocks which were stepped in height that ranged from five storeys to eight storeys high creating a floor area of 15,500 m². The projects delivery was also aligned with the stages of the RIBA Plan of Works (2013). The MBT application was used over a period of one year and gathered qualitative and quantitative data around Field BIM or on-site uses of MBT. 3D models were transferred using the IFC file format, while 2D-based information, including drawings and specifications, used the PDF format.

The case study research involved a launch workshop at the beginning of the project; observations about various uses of MBT on the case study project over 12 months of the project; and a questionnaire at the end of the project. The use of this range of methods within the context of a case study project provided a wealth of detail which could not be captured at a higher organisational or industry level. Furthermore, the results obtained from the project case study were triangulated by independent testing through an interview with an expert from outside the project case study. The outline solution structure of the MBT application to perform Field BIM on the case study project is given in Figure 2. Under the solution, ten tablets were procured and given to the site managers for the duration of 12 months until project completion. The use of MBT on the project required to “double-handle” the IFC exchange format from the common data environment (CDE) and then reupload this to the Field BIM application.

4.1 Mobile building information modelling technologies launch workshop

A launch workshop was undertaken with the project team participating in the live real project. The workshop was held in the site offices prior to the MBT implementation over the course of one day. The workshop involved all ten site managers who were active participants in the case study project. The participants had no prior experience with any proprietary MBT, which is important to reduce potential bias in requirements identification.

The workshop agenda was developed and issued one week prior to the workshop and consisted of; Explanation of planned BIM uses and deliverables on the case study project, introduction to the MBT application and an open sharing of views on MBT requirements via a brainstorming session.

The workshop started with an introductory session which consisted of three presentations that introduced the concepts of Field BIM and MBT. The first presentation explained the contractual BIM requirements present within the case study project and how they were to be delivered against. The second presentation proposed definitions of MBT, Field BIM, the differences between these two terms and the solution to be used on the project. The third presentation described the processes and guidelines adopted within the organisation, the management of compliance with the organisation’s guidelines, the tools and techniques currently used to meet the organisations guidelines and how the proposed MBT solution could contribute to these processes.

After the introductory session, the group collectively participated in a brainstorming session to determine, from a site management perspective, how the features of the MBT and Field BIM solution could intersect their day-to-day management processes for the benefit of the project. Predefined discipline and construction management areas were provided for identifying potential intersections with MBT capabilities. The BIM capabilities, consisting of the core technical features of the MBT solution were summarised by the workshop prior to the workshop. These included: View 3D Model Files, View 2D drawings, specifications and similar associated construction documents, produce digital tasks that are linked to both the 3D and 2D environment, produce digital forms that are linked to both the 3D and 2D environment, and carry out analysis on the produced digital tasks and forms.

The participants were then required to consider how these technical features could intersect with the following organisational and project disciplines; health and safety, environmental. quality, site record keeping and programme, design, cost and BIM.

The output from this research activity is further described alongside the taxonomy of requirements for MBT in Section 7. The interactions matrix was revisited at the end of the project by the same participants to check the validity of initial interactions and add potentially new ones learned from the application of MBT on the live project. The additional interactions identified are highlighted in grey. Interestingly, most of the new interactions identified could not be understood or identified by the workshop participants as they depend on trends of data captured over time that they were able to witness during the live project. The quantitative evidence about the application of the MBT in the live project is presented in the next subsection.

4.2 Use of mobile building information modelling technologies in live project

The use data of the MBT in the live project was accessed via the administration interface upon project completion by the project BIM Manager. This enabled all relevant usage data to be extracted for analysis. The data reported in Table 2 was sourced from the MBT application by the ten site managers and the project’s BIM Manager over a one-year project duration (Table 2). This shows a significant number of digital tasks and forms that were completed on the project using the selected MBT. Digital forms and tasks refer to the digital equivalent of paper-based processes that the organisation and project team would be required to complete to comply with the standards, processes and guidelines adopted within the project. Examples of a digital task and a digital form generated on the case study project are anonymised and shown in Figures 3 and 4, respectively.

4.3 End of case study questionnaire

One year after the launch workshop described in Section 4.1 and towards the completion of the case study project, the same ten site managers in the case study project team were asked to complete a questionnaire on the overall performance of the MBT over the duration of the project. The purpose of the questionnaire was to obtain feedback on the MBT performance, where its use was of benefit and equally where it was not. This would then contribute to the discussion on the utilisation of Field BIM and MBT at a project level as set out in the methodology.

The questionnaire was executed via an online platform, and sent via email to each individual manager. The performance of the MBT was rated with nine-point Likert scale questions which were structured to avoid a neutral response. One free text response was also executed to obtain further data that may not have been previously considered in the other questions. The rating of the key capabilities of the MBT by the ten site managers is summarised in Table 3.

The participants were given the opportunity to provide open qualitative comments about their experience in implementing Field BIM. One manager (M6) commented that the MBT was not provided to every subcontractor on site from the beginning, which led to a combination of both drawings and MBT used on site. Nevertheless, M6 argued that “it is very helpful to look at a 3D model to see how the area we are working on is supposed to look like”.

Another manager (M7) commented upon both the strengths and the weaknesses of the MBT and suggested some further development:

I use the application mostly on an iOS device. This seems to be more intuitive than the desktop version which has a more complicated user interface. I find the model viewing on iOS excellent, but issuing forms from the mobile application really needs improvement. Other suggestions would be the further use of the location service on mobile devices to automatically pin-point current location within the building and adding augmented reality to view areas with the model overlaid.

Another Manager (M8) summed up some of the efficiencies enabled by the MBT:

I have not needed to download any drawings from the mobile application, just to view them. The capability to send an email alert with a summary snagging items new, open, updated is useful.

4.4 Independent expert interview

As previously identified, the ten site managers on the case study project had no prior experience of MBT. To substantiate and augment the identified use cases through the workshop with the ten site managers, an additional interview with an expert from outside the project case study was held. This step was important to address the issues about potential limitations stemming from the potential relationships between the context of the considered field testing and the research outcomes, as well as the need to access independent expert knowledge gained over years of use of MBT in various project environments. In this context, an expert is an individual who possesses the technical, process and interpretive knowledge in their areas of expertise (Bogner et al., 2009). In line with this definition, the requirements for the selected expert included: independence from the case study project; experience of adopting MBT across multiple projects; and construction management experience in projects of similar values to the case study project.

The identified expert also had to be external to the case study project team but working within the same organisation so as not to inhibit the findings and offer new insights not previously considered. The selected Project Manager had delivered a £70m commercial project in London using MBT. The interview was undertaken while the case study project was in construction. The interview took place in isolation from all case study participants over a period of two weeks of part-time questioning. For consistency with the initial MBT Launch workshop, the interview covered the same MBT technological features as established for the Case Study project launch workshop, set out in Section 4.1.

The key findings from the transcribed interview were about the functionalities of MBT and their use and benefits within the context of an information management framework.

Regarding the functionalities, the Project Manager noted that the MBT applications can manage “all of the forms, tasks, processes, meeting minutes, diaries and general day to day documentation that managers required to run a modern-day construction site”. This complements the findings from the life construction project, which showed that site managers were predominantly using the MBT application for the generation of forms and tasks.

Regarding the use of MBT within the information management framework and their benefits, the project manager highlighted:

The system links into a building information model or current up-to-date drawings which all are kept and accessed on the one system. This also gives us the ability to add and upload all further information needed in the current climate such as British Standards, manufacturers recommendations, test and inspection sheets, functionality inspections as well as Mechanical and Electrical completion certifications like NIC EIC certificates and much more.

This also supports the findings from the MBT Case Study project, which showed the uses of MBT for the uploading and viewing of project documentation.

The Project Manager further highlighted that the full usage of an MBT application can “support the Golden Thread of Information [1] as mentioned within the current Hackett Report”. At the end of the interview, the project manager highlighted that “a compulsory and systematic training for both site and subcontractors’ teams is critical for the successful implementation of MBT”.

5. Organisational perspective

The understanding of MBT requirements at an organisational level is limited in existing literature (Mahamadu et al., 2013). It is important to address this gap to develop a complete set of requirements for MBT to cover both project and organisation requirements. To address this gap, an organisational requirements workshop was held to capture organisational requirements, as these would not have been captured from the previous research activities aimed at a project level. The workshop involved five participants from a large main contracting company who held differing roles that reside externally to any individual project. This allowed roles that oversee multiple projects and undertake organisational-level activities not specific to a single project to be understood. The workshop was held separately from the case study project. The selected five participants were required to be in centrally based technology management roles (e.g. independent of an any single project) in the contractor organisation with prior experience of implementing MBT.

The workshop was held during Stage 4 of the case study project to complete the data collection from all sources at the same time. Facilitation of the workshop was provided by the project BIM Manager to consider the potential linkage between the two data sources. The roles of the four participants and the requirements elicited from each participant are summarised in Table 4.

6. Independent industry perspective

To complement and triangulate the findings from the three previous research methods applied at the project and organisation level, a questionnaire aimed at the wider industry was executed via SurveyMonkey to various roles and organisations across Europe. This was also undertaken to fulfil the requirements of the methodology and collect information about the wider industry use of MBT. All three levels of investigations were then integrated into the proposed Taxonomy of MBT technical requirements. This also allowed validation of the Use Cases and Requirements derived from both the project and organisational levels.

Given the prior knowledge captured about MBT from the variety of research methods executed earlier and the size of the participant sample, a questionnaire survey was considered an appropriate means of data collection (Fellows and Liu, 2008; Easterby-Smith et al., 2008). The questionnaire was executed after the case study project and comprised of a combination of closed and open-ended questions. Taherdoost (2016a, 2016b) notes that size of a selected sample should be relative to the complexity of the population, the aims of the researcher and the types of statistical manipulation that will be used to analyse the data. As this is an emerging area of applications within the construction industry and given the complementary role of this survey, the questionnaire targeted 40 respondents who were purposively selected based on the following sampling criteria: have an understanding or experience of using MBT and are in professional roles or disciplines such as: Commercial and Operation Managers; Site Managers Consultants; Research Professionals; End Users/Building Operators; and BIM Professionals. These experts were recruited at an international MBT industry conference.

To align the survey with the case study project, the questions focused on concepts to support the development of the taxonomy: the perceived uses and benefits of deploying MBT on the construction site, the risks and considerations associated with deploying MBT that could restrict its use and the roles most likely to be impacted using MBT. The results of the survey were then used to both validate existing requirements and recurring themes of the taxonomy and identify new or missing ones where applicable.

The findings of the data collected from the executed questionnaire are summarised as follows:

• A total of 60% of participants were working in organisations that adopted MBT and 40% (16) had an understanding of MBT.

• A total of 97.5% believed that Mobile BIM can improve the way a construction site operates.

• The benefits that can be achieved from MBT were investigated using an open-ended question so as to not inhibit the content of the responses. The responses were then coded into the following most popular group themes (Figure 5).

• Regarding access to the BIM model, 60% of participants prefer access via a MBT, while 20% prefer not to access it via the MBT. For the participants who opted for others (20%), an open text field was provided for further elaboration. The most popular response in the “Other” response underlined that the preference of device was dependent upon the activity being carried out. As summarised by one of the respondents who noted, “Mobile can be fiddly so it depends on the complexity. On-site team members have less time, so if it is a complicated process it is best in the office”.

• The risk perceived by the participants from the use of MBT was collected using an open-ended question. They were then coded in the categories described in Figure 6.

• A total of 67% believed that the ability of BIM information conveyed via MBT to carry enough data and details for use on site; 18% disagreed and 15% opted for “others” (free text field). A common theme in the “Other” field argues that the level of detail in a model could be achieved if enough time was provided upfront to produce the required information. This is further explained by one respondent who stated that “In order to ensure sufficient data were within the model, more time will be required up front to input this data […] having the data in the model takes time and therefore more time is required earlier (in the project)”.

• The role that would be most impacted by MBT according to the participants are listed in Figure 7. The project manager is the role that 67% of participants foresee as the role that would be most affected by MBT (Figure 7). Of the respondents who selected “Other” (23%), the most common response by 33% of participants suggested that all roles on a project would benefit from an MBT application. Further additional roles that were suggested to benefit included safety managers, tradespeople/on-site operatives, fire brigade and ICT-related roles.

• In total, 67% trust 3D content more than a 2D-based drawing while 18% did not. Of the respondents who selected “Other” (15%), the unanimous response provided was that it was dependent upon the nature of the content being viewed, suggesting that it is more appropriate to view some information in 2D opposed to 3D. This is summarised by one such respondent who stated, “It depends on the nature of the content being viewed. Some pieces of information are better viewed in 2D”. This is further supported by another respondent who stated that “Some things might not be in the 3D model”.

7. Mobile building information modelling technologies: taxonomy and interactions with core construction management areas

The investigations performed at project and organisational were subject to thematic analysis and coded into themes (see Appendix for details). These themes were then expanded upon from the responses elicited, the observed MBT functionality and the potential use cases into technical requirements, which has culminated in the development of a taxonomy for MBT Requirements.

The requirements are split into project and organisational requirements, and then categorised into specific sub-topics which are derived from each data source. The industry-level considerations were used to triangulate and enhance the findings from the project and organisational investigations. Figure 8 shows the first two levels of the taxonomy. The project requirements deal with the functional aspects of a Field BIM solution to enable it successful deployment on construction sites. The organisational requirements gleaned are largely non-functional aspects such as legal status of the technology provider, data security and connectivity with existing internal organisational systems. These are necessary to ensure the adoption and its longevity within organisations.

Another key deliverable of this study is the understanding of the interactions between the MBT features, the potential use cases supported by perceived benefits and the key construction management areas. As described in Section 4.0, this was obtained in a workshop at the beginning of the project and updated following the practical use of the MBT for 12 months within the project. The output from this workshop was summarised in a “MBT Feature – Construction Management area” interactions matrix (Table 5). This matrix clearly documents the several interactions linking each MBT feature to a specific construction management area, where the interactions are used to describe the capabilities or use cases that can be achieved at each intersection. Some intersections were viewed differently by different project parties, due to each site manager having a different focus within their role such as a package of work (e.g. building envelope works) or a discipline (e.g. planning and sequencing of the works). However, the interaction matrix reported the commonalities between the participants’ input in terms of prevailing use cases for each intersection. When revisited at the end of the project, the existing interactions were validated and some new interactions (highlighted in light grey) were added. The construction management functions involved in the matrix reflected the use cases captured from the industry survey (see Figure 5).

8. Discussion and conclusions

Field BIM applications have started to receive significant attention due to their important role in connecting the construction management functions of individual subcontractors with the overall coordination of general contractors and linking these back to the project control at the enterprise-level project control. Another key value proposition is their ability to establish a bi-directional flow of information between design information (model, specification, etc.) and the site.

Their value proposition was identified in studies investigating the integration of MBT in project workflows (Becerik-Gerber et al., 2011; McCabe et al., 2017; Hamledari et al., 2018). Existing studies have addressed a variety of MBT facets, including MBT access to information databases (Kim et al., 2008), use of such information from design in site inspection applications (Nguyen et al., 2015), key capabilities and benefits (Wang and Chong, 2015 and Abanda et al., 2018) and security of information (Mahamadu et al., 2013). However, some important gaps in the literature were identified, including the lack of research into general constructs such as taxonomies for MBTs; an understanding of their capabilities and use within the industry; and a lack of delineation between the related term such as Mobile BIM, Field BIM, Site BIM, Cloud BIM and Mobile Apps.

This study contributed to addressing this gap by developing two new constructs (i.e. a taxonomy of requirements for MBT and an interaction matrix of MBT uses with core construction management functions) and evaluating the current uses of MBT within the industry. A mixed methods approach, combining qualitative and quantitative methods, enabled to combine various insights about MBT and the establishment of the two constructs and the understanding of practical uses of MBT within the industry.

The taxonomy of requirements for MBT included three levels, and the requirements were split into two parts: the project and the organisational requirements. The former focused on the site functionalities of the MBT for site and information management. The latter focused on the integration of MBT solution with the organisation from information technology, legal and security perspectives. This taxonomy, which is the first of its kind, for MBTs has theoretical implications and practical uses. Its theoretical implications can, for example, be in the way it helps researchers to structure their investigation of key uses of MBT applications and their benefits. It can also be used by researchers aiming to investigate more holistic solutions for the digitalisation of construction sites, such as those enabled by Digital Twins. Its practical uses can be in the way it guides construction organisations to select suitable MBT for Field BIM in their projects. It can act as a baseline against which varying MBT solutions can be compared. The taxonomy’s structure and hierarchy reflect the characteristics of MBT as technologies that can be implemented either to control a selected project viewed as a silo data source or be part of a broader data ecosystem of an organisation/enterprise or technology such as Digital Twin.

The developed interaction matrix of MBT uses with core construction management functions also has theoretical implications and practical uses. Its theoretical implications are inherent in the intersections between the MBT functionalities and the site’s construction management functions. Such intersections can be theoretically investigated from Lean Construction’s perspective and/or benefit evaluation. They can also be part of research and practice involving the development of data-driven construction approaches. Another contribution of this research was the clarification of terms used (Mobile BIM, Field BIM, Site BIM, Cloud BIM and Mobile Apps) and the introduction and definition of the terms MBT and Field BIM to delineate the two concepts.

Future research is required in this area of MBT to establish a more holistic theoretical framework for MBT where uses and benefits are investigated from the lens of Lean Construction and/or a data-driven construction management. The findings can also be used in future to support the integration of MBT in digital twins for construction site operation.

Figures

Figure 1.

Research design

Figure 2.

MBT solution structure

Figure 3.

Example of digital task represented within field BIM

Figure 4.

Blank example of digital form represented within field BIM

Figure 5.

Industry questionnaire results – benefits of MBT

Figure 6.

Industry questionnaire results – perceived risks of MBT

Figure 7.

Industry questionnaire results – role most impacted by MBT

Figure 8.

Requirements taxonomy for MBT

Table 1.

Summary of terms and research approaches used in MBT field

Reference	MBT term	Technology chosen
Abanda et al. (2018)	Cloud/Mobile BIM	Mobile Devices, Mobile Applications and Cloud Applications
Alizadeh Salehi and Yitmen (2018)	Field Data and BIM	Laser Scanning, RFID, UWB, GPS, Barcode and WSN
Chang et al. (2013)	Mobile BIM	Smart Phone, Tablet and QR Codes
Chen and Kamara (2008)	Mobile Computing	Tablet PC’s, Pocket Computers and Palm Tops
Chen and Kamara (2011)	Mobile Computing	Tablet PC’s, Pocket Computers and Palm Tops
Chong et al. (2014)	Cloud Computing	Cloud Applications, Computers and Mobile Access
Chu et al. (2018)	Mobile BIM	Augmented Reality and Mobile Smartphone
Chuang et al. (2011)	Cloud Computing	Computers
Cox et al. (2002)	Pocket PC Technology	Pocket PC
Davies and Harty (2013)	Site BIM	Mobile Tablet Personal Computers
Elvin (2003)	Tablet and Wearable Computers	Tablet and Wearable Computers
Froese (2010)	Information Technology (Generally)	Information Technology
Hamledari et al. (2018)	Mobile Technologies	Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV)
Hong and Yu (2018)	BIM Application for Mobile Devices	Portable Devices
Kang et al. (2012)	BIM to Field	Robotic Total Station
Karrbom Gustavsson et al. (2012)	Information Technology (Generally)	Information Technology
Kim et al. (2013)	Mobile Computing Technology	Smart Phone
Kimoto et al. (2005)	Mobile Computing System	Personal Digital Assistant (PDA)
Ozan Koseoglu and Nurtan-Gunes (2018)	Mobile BIM	Tablets and Mobile Applications
Hong et al. (2019)	Mobile BIM	Smart Phones, Smart Pads and Surface Books
Lin et al. (2016)	BIM Technology	PC and Tablets
Lin and Golparvar-Fard (2021).	Visual Production Management System	4D Programming and Point Clouds
Ma et al. (2017)	BIM-based Mobile Technologies	Smart Phone and Mobile Applications
Mahamadu et al. (2013)	BIM-Cloud	Cloud Computing
Michalski et al. (2022)	BIM Technology	Various
Mutis and Mehraj (2022)	Cloud BIM	Various
Nasrazadani et al. (2020)	Interactive Virtual Environment	Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality
Nayaka and Banerjee (2021)	Cyber Physical Systems (CPS)	Various
Nourbakhsh et al. (2012)	Mobile Application	Computer, Cell Phone and PDA
Park et al. (2016a, 2016b)	Mobile BIM	Bluetooth Low Energy Devices, Tablets, Computers and Cloud Services
Park et al. (2016a, 2016b)	Cloud-enabled BIM	Bluetooth Low Energy Devices, Tablets, Computers and Cloud Services
Pulcrano (2022)	CLOUD-to-BIM-to-VR	VR App and Mobile Devices
Rolfsen et al. (2019)	App/Mobile Apps	Smartphones, Tablets and Mobile Applications
Rolfsen and Lassen (2020)	App/Mobile Apps	Smartphones, Tablets and Mobile Applications
Sriprasert and Dawood (2003)	Mobile Information Management System	Computers and PDA
Um et al. (2023)	BIM AR SE	Augmented Reality (AR)
Wong et al. (2014)	Cloud BIM	Desktops, Laptops, Servers, Mobiles, Tablets and Database
Zhao and Taib (2022)	Cloud BIM	Various

Notes:

RFID = Radio frequency identification; UWB = Ultra-wideband; GPS = Global positioning system; WSN = Wireless sensor network; PC = Personal computers

Source: Author’s own creation

Table 2.

Case study MBT usage overview

Manager ID	No. of tasks	No. of forms	Models uploaded	Drawings uploaded	Documents uploaded
BIM manager	1	8	7	153	80
SM1	13	16	n/a	n/a	n/a
SM2	32	3	n/a	n/a	n/a
SM3	63	9	n/a	n/a	n/a
SM4	85	5	n/a	n/a	n/a
SM5	211	59	n/a	n/a	n/a
SM6	237	54	n/a	n/a	n/a
SM7	419	73	n/a	n/a	n/a
SM8	824	28	n/a	n/a	n/a
SM9	1,214	137	n/a	n/a	n/a
SM10	865	33	n/a	n/a	n/a
Totals	3,964	425	7	153	80

Source: Author’s own creation

Table 3.

End of case study questionnaire results

MBT function	Unacceptable (%)	Poor (%)	Good (%)	Excellent (%)
Viewing of 2D drawings	0	0	60	40
Viewing of 3D models	0	0	40	60
Ease of finding correct room/space in a 3D model	0	0	40	60
Ease of finding correct equipment in a 3D model	0	0	40	60
Download of 2D drawings	0	0	90	10
Download of 3D models	0	10	80	10
Effectiveness of communication with project team and subs	0	20	70	10
Understanding of design intent	0	0	80	20
How good is the application at creating/viewing issues (such as snags) and forms (such as diaries)?	10	0	90	0

Source: Author’s own creation

Table 4.

Organisational-level MBT requirements

Role	Elicited requirements
BIM Manager	MBT should have both functional and non-functional requirements that align with project and organisational requirements, respectively
	MBT solution must support interoperable file formats so that it can be used independent of any authoring platform
	MBT solution needs to be able to interact with existing applications
	MBT should consider the formats that can be imported/exported while also the level of interaction that can be achieved with both 3D and 2D content
	MBT should be able to retain all associated data while being able to revise both 2D and 3D content
IT Project Manager	MBT providers should be subjected to Financial Credit Checks to ensure the risk of discontinuity is mitigated
	MBT providers and resellers should be selected based on service level agreements, among other terms and conditions
	MBT providers should provide Business Continuity Plan to decrease the risk of any adverse events to the adopting organisation
Solutions Architect	MBT should be tested on the adopting organisations operating systems, both desktop and mobile, to ensure that there are no adverse interactions with existing systems
	MBT capabilities should be prioritised (e.g. using MoSCoW approach) to provide a minimum requirement versus the best-case scenario solution
	MBT should have an appropriate level of security, including relevant certification, penetration testing, disaster recovery planning and the physical location of data
	MBT should offer adaptable administrative functionality so that access can be controlled and/or granted to only permitted users
Business analyst	MBT should be subjected to User Acceptance Testing (UAT) to independently test functionalities outside of a case study project
	MBT application and outcomes can be maximised through structured training programmes for all organisational and project roles involved in MBT workflows
	MBT ease of use and accessibility, especially for project operational roles, are critical to their implementation success. Feedback from such roles should be prioritised
BIM director	MBT should have links with the CDE to reduce the time and effort of managing project information
	MBT should enable individual project analysis and multiple project cross-analysis to provide data-driven insights about project performance

Source: Author’s own creation

Table 5.

Interactions between MBT features and key construction management areas

Core CM area MBT feature	Health and safety	Quality	Environmental	Site records and programme	Design	Cost	BIM
View 3D model files in the field	– Understand potential construction risks in design – e.g. working at height – Access to relevant H&S data within the model	– Access to relevant quality data within the model – e.g. specification references – Understand design intent	– Access to relevant environmental data within the model – e.g. BREEAM, EPC, Life Span of product	– Compare site progress versus model in the field – Record progress in the field	– Compare design intent versus installation – Understand coordination issues	– Compare site progress versus model in the field	– Access to model data in the field – Compare model data to installed assets – Share model issues from the field with real-life context
View 2D drawings and documentation in the field	– Understand detail that may not be recorded within the model – e.g. CDM risks – Access to relevant specifications, standards and guidance	– Understand detail that may not be recorded within the model – e.g. interface details – Access to relevant specifications, standards and guidance	– Understand detail that may not be recorded within the model – e.g. BREEAM information – Access to relevant specifications, standards and guidance	– Understand detail that may not be recorded within the model – e.g. objects that may not be modelled – Access to relevant specifications, standards and guidance	– Understand detail that may not be recorded within the model – e.g. objects that may not be modelled – Access to relevant specifications, standards and guidance	– Ability to visualise elements that are costed but not modelled – Access to relevant specifications, standards and guidance	– Monitor compliance with BEP and associated standards remotely – Access to wider BIM documentation for reference in real life environment for compliance
Produce digital tasks linked to either 2D or 3D environment in the field	– Action on-site hazard observations – Action H&S good practice – Address non-compliance issues – Accessible Site Audit Trail	– Action on-site quality issues; e.g. snagging and defective materials – Action incomplete works – Accessible site audit trail	– Address on-site environmental issues; e.g. water discharge, dust, noise and vibration – Accessible site audit trail	– Action incomplete works – Accessible site audit trail – Record the status of project at regular intervals for future reference; e.g. condition of scaffolding and fire stopping installation	– Technical queries from the field – Requests for information from the field – Address non-compliance issues – e.g. incorrect materials – Accessible site audit trail	– Access to all site activity to understand which organisations are performing which activities – Monitor progress against costs	– Address BIM compliance issues – Utilisation of BCF to communicate back to design team – Establish connections between site data and model data
Produce digital forms linked to either 2D or 3D environment in the field	– Production of regular forms – e.g. permits, inspections and drills – Accessible evidence of controlling the works – Access to historical data over duration of project	– Production of regular quality forms – e.g. Inspection checklist, pre-start checklist, quality plans – Access to historical and live site data	– Production of regular quality forms – e.g. environmental inspection checklist, waste records and quality plans – Access to historical and live site data	– Record site progress; planned vs actual – Access to live site data to understand progress over duration of project	– Manage change control and understand impact on design – Detailed technical queries and requests for information – Approve design solutions on site – Access to site data audit trail	– Manage change control and understand impact on design – Understand flow of information and impact on progress and costs – Manage sign off of work packages for payments	– Record model compliance against agreed deliverables – Establish connections between site data and model data
Perform analysis on digital data created in the field	– Identify quickly key current H&S issues and the actions required – Establish trends in data against variables – e.g. amount of cleanliness issues by contractor discipline or building area	– Identify and understand quality issues and the actions required to deal with them – Establish trends in data against variables – e.g. amount of fire issues by contractor discipline	– Understand where current issues are quickly, and actions required – Establish trends in data against variables – e.g. amount of missing BREEAM data by design discipline	– Understand where current issues are quickly, and actions required – Establish trends in data against variables – e.g. amount of delays in planned vs actual by contractor discipline	– Understand where current issues are quickly, and actions required – Establish trends in data against variables – e.g. amount of coordination issues by design discipline	– Understand where current issues are quickly, and actions required – Establish trends in data against variables – e.g. amount of outstanding work by contractor discipline to substantiate payments	– Understand where current issues are quickly, and actions required – Establish trends in data against variables – e.g. amount of outstanding model issues by model author organisation

Note:

CM = Construction management

Source: Author’s own creation

Table A1.

Detailed MBT project and organisational technical requirements

Requirement level	Category	Technical requirement
Project	Import model files	The system must be able to import design models in an IFC format
		The system should be able to import design models in an RVT format
		The system should be able to import federated models in an NWD format
		The system must be able to combine multiple models into a federated model
		The system should be able to import BCF files into the model viewing platform
	Viewing model files	The system must be able to view single disciplinary 3D models on a tablet/in the field
		The system must be able to view federated 3D models on a tablet/in the field
		The system should be able to simultaneously view 2D views with a corresponding 3D view on the same screen of a tablet
		The system should be able to view data attributes contained within model objects
		The system should be able to view the model via augmented reality to compare with real-world positions
	Additional file type support	The system must be able to import and view PDF files in the field/on a tablet
		The system should be able to import and view BCF files in conjunction with a model on a tablet
		The system should be able to import and view DWG files on a tablet/in the field
	Export file types	The system should be able to export/send BCF files from the software
		The system should be able to export/send COBie data from the software
		The system should be able to export/send marked up PDF’s from the software
	Model manipulation	The system should be able to enter data against model objects in the field/on the tablet
		The system should be able to alter data within model objects in the field/on the tablet
		The system should be able to take measurements on the model in the field/on the tablet, in both 2D/3D
		The system should be able to mark up a model in the field/on a tablet
		The system must be able to cut sections through a model on a tablet/in the field
		The system must be able to hide model objects while viewing on a tablet/in the field
		The system should be able to hide entire models while viewing on a tablet/in the field
	Task management and forms	The system must be able to generate tasks in the field that can be related to either 2D Plans or 3D geometry
		The system must be able to create forms in the field that can be associated to either 2D Plans, 3D geometry or stored as standalone document
		The system should be able for supply chain to be able to access their own tasks and close out in the field
		The system should be able for supply chain to be able to access their own forms and add to or close out in the field
		The system should be able for supply chain to be able to forward a task on to their respective suppliers for close out
		The system should be able to update progress information in the field against tasks within a construction programme
	Analysis of tasks and forms	The system should be able to analyse tasks and form information across multiple projects
		The system must be able to analyse our task numbers and understand how many are outstanding per organisation
		The system must be able to analyse our form numbers and understand how many are open, closed or in progress
		The system should be able to determine what fundamental data is missing/incorrect from a model object within the field software
		The system should be able to undertake root cause analysis of tasks such as snags within a project and across multiple projects
		The system should be able to determine who has accessed the field BIM system and on what dates and times
	Hardware support	The system must be able to work on the iOS mobile operating system
		The system must be able to support the use of photos in the field
		The system should be able to attach documents stored on the tablet (e.g. pdf, photo gallery, etc.)
		The system should be able to support the use of QR Codes
	Administrative functionality	The system should be able to automatically read 3D room data and correspond this to a 2D general arrangement
		The system must be able to have clear user groups determining visibility, extent of input and control of the system that can be given to a user
		The organisations supply chain should be able to manage their own “sub area” of the system
		The system must be able to set up clear workflows for tasks and forms
		The system should be able to set up a Business Unit with Default Business templates that can be used across all projects
		The system must be able to generate business forms that would mean an update to a business form can be applied to all projects in one go
		The system should be able to generate an automated link from the project CDE to the field tool system
	Information revisions and change management	The system must be able to revise a model and retain any tasks, comments or forms associated with the superseded geometry
		The system must be able to revise a drawing and retain any tasks, comments or forms associated with the superseded drawing
		The system should be able to analyse the differences between two revisions of the same model
		The system should be able to analyse the differences between two revisions of the same drawing
Organisational	Accessibility	The system should have measures in place for users with language or access needs to be able to effectively use the system
		The system should have measures in place to support access for the visually impaired, for example, scaling the size of fonts
	System audit	The system changes must be auditable, when data is appended to the model, to include date, time and user captured
		The system must ensure that only users in security user groups are able to read audit details
		The supplier must confirm how the system will be able to report on all system users and allocated permissions; e.g. group membership, individual permissions, allocated roles and active date
	Compatibility	The supplier must confirm the mobile application working online or offline is compatible with iOS mobile operating system
	Supplier IT maturity	The supplier should confirm compliance with best practice standards of software development through the use of proven methodology, experienced resources and quality standards to achieve at least CMMI Level 3 deliverables
	Supplier support service level	The system must have an appropriate level of support to accommodate typical working hours of 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. GMT
		The system should have a suitable level of training material to provide to both administrators and users
		The supplier must provide suitable telephone support for the system to sustain business operations with practical response times
		The supplier must provide suitable email support for the system to sustain business operations with practical response times
		The supplier must define the system service desk availability
		The supplier must define when service updates occur for outside standard UK business hours
		The supplier must provide SLAs to maintain a service level that supports the business and technical user needs
		The supplier must confirm the system availability
		The system must manage errors effectively, i.e. uploads, system crash, incorrect data entered or security violations and the supplier must provide evidence to support this
		The supplier must provide evidence that the system supports the creation of user-friendly error codes on the incidence of error
		The system must provide help and user support to maximise the adoption and functional use of the system
		The system must provide context sensitive help that recognises a user’s proficiency in system use
		The system must allow for the provision of online help, online user training, SCORM compliant e-learning modules aimed at basic, intermediary, advanced users and administrative users
		The system must allow for the provision of a help desk and resolver group for allocated incidents, bug fixes and allocated queries
		The supplier must confirm the documented change request process, including how customers can request changes
		The supplier must define the software update process and timescales
		The supplier must define the response times for P1, P2, P3 and P4 incidents
		The supplier must define the monitoring process for P1, P2, P3 and P4 incidents
	Upload and download performance	The supplier must confirm the expected performance for uploading a model over the organisations network and when the model will be available
		The supplier must confirm the expected performance for downloading a model over the organisations network
		The supplier must confirm the expected performance to upload a model over 4G and when the model will be available
		The supplier must confirm the expected performance to download a model over 4G
		The system performance must align with industry standard response times for page load times and interactions (i.e. sub 3 s)
	Flexibility and scalability	The system must support the current userbase concurrently users rising to wider business users within specified timescales
		The supplier must provide evidence of how the system supports changing demands on system capacity for storage, transaction processing, computing power and increased load by demand of users
	Security	The system must support single sign on through ADFS3
		The system mobile application must work on mobile devices that have been encrypted
		The system must be secure with managed user access with unique identifiable credentials, restricted access to system functions based on user permissions and protected data that is encrypted at rest and in transit
		The system must allow for controlled access by group access rights
		The system must be certified to required data security standards For example, Security Standards within ISO27001 and Cyber Essentials Plus
		The system should have a data centre that is based in the EU
		The system must allow for the password to be stored in an encrypted format
		The system must allow for the password to be masked upon entry
		The system must allow for the password to meet the stated organisations password policy
		The system should allow for a user to authenticate to the system using multi-factor authentication
		The system must support different authentication types which can be applied to individual users. This must include ADFS authentication and password authentication
		The system must be compliant with security standards ISO27001 and cyber security essentials
		All critical security updates and patches must be applied within seven days
		The supplier must be pro-active in addressing identified security risks; e.g. from regular penetration tests
	System backup and recovery	The supplier must provide documented back up procedures, for example, in the event of a system failure
		The supplier must meet the organisations requirement for RPO and RTO (i.e. Recovery point objective/Return to operations)
		The system must have documented back up procedures in the event of a system failure
		The supplier must confirm when the last Business continuity plan test was completed and the review process
		The supplier must define the system disaster recovery plan
	Data storage and management	The supplier must confirm for a SAAS application, the maximum size of a model supportable to be at least 1,024 mb/1 gb
		The system should have a clear archiving procedure and an established protocol for extracting project information upon completion
		The system must align to existing data privacy regulations governing the use of personal information and data
		The system must demonstrate how it completes archiving of older data for long-term retention, and how an organisation can extract this to their servers
		The supplier must confirm that at an organisation is able to delete all the data or leave it in an encrypted inaccessible state
		The supplier must confirm how the system will log user actions and make this data available for reporting for 90 days, that cannot be edited or switched off with the ability to extend the period beyond this limit
		The supplier must confirm how the system will alert the system administrator when limitations of data storage per project is being approached at 80% capacity, 90% capacity and 100% capacity
	Errors and alerts	The supplier must confirm how the system will be able to issue system messages to a user, user groups or roles informing them of upcoming system actions; e.g. maintenance downtime and application updates
	Contract and payment jurisdiction	The supplier must provide evidence that the contract will be under the laws of the UK and Northern Ireland
		The supplier must provide evidence that all supplier payments will be made in £ sterling
	Technology provider legal status	Please confirm your Company Name and/or Trading Identity
		Where there is a Parent Company, please confirm the name and the existence of a parent company guarantee
		Legal structure of the company (standalone, subsidiary, privately-owned, Plc, Limited, employee-owned and part employee-owned)
Legal registered name, number and address
What is your Dun and Bradstreet DUNS number
Technology provider financial performance	Revenue and pre-tax profits for the past three years, latest forecast for the current fiscal year, fiscal year start date, account management structure)
Other	Organisation relationship management

Note:

CMMI = Capability maturity model integration; NWD = Navisworks document; BCF = BIM Collaboration format; SLAs = Service level agreements; ADFS3 = Active directory federation services

Note

1. The golden thread represents both the information about a building that allows someone to understand a building and keep it safe, and the information management to ensure the information is accurate, easily understandable, can be accessed by those who need it, and is up to date (MHCLG, 2021).